Regulation and governance supporting systemic MaaS innovations

Abstract

Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) is an example of a systemic innovation, where mobility services addressing different customers' transportation needs are integrated with real-time traveler information, ticketing, and payment services. This paper examines how the differences in institutional setup, stakeholder processes and viewpoints, and technological development have resulted in different approaches to regional governance when supporting systemic innovations in transportation. Two European regions with established collaboration networks in transportation and spatial planning are compared. These regions are the Growth Corridor Finland and the Basel metropolitan area in Switzerland. During August 2017, an invitation to online questionnaire was sent to 410 stakeholders, who had been participating in different stakeholder processes, such as pilot projects, strategy development groups, academic projects, and infrastructure projects in the field of mobility and commuting. With 99 completed questionnaires, the overall response rate was 24.1%. The answers were analyzed to collect stakeholder experiences from previous collaboration efforts, to assess the importance of transportation innovations to the work of these stakeholders, and to get insights about current barriers and supporting factors when developing these systemic innovations. As a result, managerial implications are discussed for these formal collaboration networks in their aspiration to support new mobility innovations.

Challenge, Coordination, and Collaboration for Effective Rural Mobility Solutions

“…Liimatainen and Mladenović (2018) highlight that public transport is the backbone of every MaaS offering thus far, so there is clearly a challenge to resolve for rural MaaS, where public transport has been tending to contract for several decades. Surakka, Härri, Haahtela, Horila and Michl (2018) highlight that Finland, for example, has a very low level of rural public transport provision which has led to a high degree of dependence on private cars, and they contrast this with the provision in Switzerland, in which an integrated system is delivered between the railways and the Postbus network which have closely coordinated timetables. However, the rural geographies and infrastructure of these two countries are not very comparable.…”

Is it who you are or what you do? Insights for Mobility as a Service from research on a car club

“…The development of MaaS faces substantial challenges because it requires collaboration between different stakeholders from private and public sector (Surakka et al 2018), such as transport and ICT platform operators, who might not trust each other for sharing data (Polydoropoulou et al 2018). MaaS success also depends on its accessibility (number of vehicles in set locations), local built environment and provision of alternative modes, e.g.…”

“…Hence, the research explores the nexus between PSS consumers' identity construction and their performance of practices in the socio-technical landscape through PSS consumption. Both of these matter for the diffusion of MaaS, because the move away from private cars has an effect on consumers' identity projection (Lyons et al 2019) and because MaaS consumption involves different practices form driving private cars (Durand et al 2018. This contribution focuses on car sharing, a type of use orientated PSS (Cherubini et al 2015), which is a key transport option (Eckhardt et al 2018, Surakka et al 2018) within a MaaS bundle (Hensher et al 2020) to attract travellers away from private cars. Indeed, researching components of MaaS such as car sharing is as useful as researching MaaS as a whole (Lyons et al 2019).…”

Governance of Emerging Autonomous Driving Development in China

“…When it comes to the government–business relationship and the regulation of AD, some academics believe that the government should pursue its own functions (e.g., safety, traffic congestion, social equity, and civil well-being) in public affairs relevant to AD by regulating the behavior of companies ( 41 ). Others argue that AD, as a fusion of IT and the automobile industry, has diverse development scenarios ( 42 , 43 ) and recommend less regulation to enable as many solutions as possible to emerge in various scenarios.…”